As of Wednesday, more than 35 players have declared for early entry into the 2015 NBA draft. Some will be lottery picks, some will be first-rounders, some will slide into the second round and some will go undrafted.
What goes into the decision-making process for a potential early entrant? How do players gather information and whom do they turn to for guidance? What are their options if they don't get drafted or if they don't earn a spot on an NBA roster, in Europe or the D-League?
Let’s look closer at what these players have already experienced and still have yet go through in the coming months, as well as exploring some of the myths around the decision to declare or not declare.
The process
When an underclass prospect is considering leaving early, his college coach will submit his name to the NBA Undergraduate Committee. This committee is comprised of NBA GMs and personnel directors of every team in the league. The committee members will each give the NBA office a range of where they feel the prospect would be selected and might give a sample of the player's strengths or deficiencies. The NBA office will then collate the information and send back to the coach a composite of the where that particular prospect stands. The prospect, family member or coach can also speak directly to head executives of teams to get direct feedback.
This information is real and should give the prospect an honest evaluation of where he stands. The NBA is not recruiting -- the league's executives don't sugarcoat their feedback. Plus, I have never known of a college coach who misled a player for his own benefit. College coaches are honest and straightforward in their presentation of the information to their players. In reality, if a player goes out and gets drafted early, it can be a benefit to future recruiting. Potential prospects want to know that the program can put guys in the NBA.
The 'adviser' challenge
Almost every elite player has an "adviser." Some advisers are informed while some aren't. The amount of misinformation at times is astounding. Most advisers are in some way tied to an agent. Like all professions, there are good agents and bad agents. Some see the big picture and give the prospect an honest evaluation, while others misrepresent the situation.
Biggest draft myths surrounding early entrants
1. If I don't get drafted or I get cut, I can make a lot of money in Europe.
Fact: The money in Europe is not what it used to be.
The NBA draft in many ways is a futures market while Europe is about productivity. Second-round picks and non-drafted players do not make big money in Europe. The top European leagues would much rather have a former NBA player with maturity and toughness than an unproven player who didn't get drafted or was cut prior to establishing himself. Players must prove themselves prior to earning real money.
The culture and language also make the transition that much more difficult. The European game is different and the training is different. It is not an easy move for a 19-year-old who is playing out of the country for the first time. NBA contracts are guaranteed but that's not the case in Europe; if a player is not productive, he will be sent home.
Some NBA teams will send second-round picks to Europe to mature and develop with the understanding they will be signed the following year. That is the best-case scenario for a player who has yet to earn a roster spot.
2. I might as well come out because I can't improve my draft position.
While many times this is true, staying another season working on one’s game and gaining another year of maturity can be a huge benefit. By doing so, a potential second-rounder might be more ready to not only stick but better deal with the transition to either the NBA or Europe. By staying in school -- although a player might not improve his draft position -- he might improve his potential to have a career. Plus, some young players are not wired to deal with the D-League or to sit on the bench and wait for their opportunity.
While sitting on the bench, will the 19-year-old player continue to work at his skill set and develop his understanding of the game? It's easy to get discouraged when you haven't been in that situation. In reality, many of the young players in the league were enabled at least until they went to college. They were made to grind and work for seven months and now they are on their own. How many have the self-discipline to work at their trade when they are not getting rewarded with playing time?
3. The D-League is an option.
It’s a vehicle, but the makeup of the D-League is not easy and the money, after taxes and living expenses, is minimal. Morever, the quality of life for most college players far exceeds the lifestyle of a D-League player. Most D-League franchises, unless owned by an NBA team and under the direction of their administration, want to win. Their coaches want to use the experience as a springboard to the NBA. Their best chance to win, oftentimes, is to play their experienced players.
If the team is committed to developing its young players, there is still a transition. A player who spent the prior season staying in luxury hotels, having catered meals, taking charters, playing in front of sold-out crowd and on national television are all of a sudden playing in front of a few hundred people and traveling on the minimum. In essence, the D-League is like playing in junior college. It takes a disciplined, focused individual to prosper in this environment.
The age factor: 21 and getting better
One of the concerns I have regarding the process is how some NBA executives look at players who stay until their junior and senior years. The grading systems in some cases actually subtract a percentage of a rating for upperclassmen. This is troubling because in essence they are saying that a 21- or 22-year-old has maxed out his potential. They don't see the same upside potential in a prospect because he is a year older.
But why is that? Do you actually think a 21- or 22-year-old has leveled off? Do scouts and personnel directors see players so many times that they start to only see a prospects' warts as opposed to their untapped potential? It is easy to have a preconceived opinion as opposed to a true, unbiased evaluation of a prospect's upside. Why not value the maturity and experience of the prospect and see where he has improved?
Many times with the infatuation of analytics, some teams primarily look at the numbers as opposed to a player’s game. A player might not improve his numbers but his basketball IQ and ability to affect winning might exceed another's statistics and projection. An experienced, mature player will typically be a better teammate and locker-room fit.